It's telling that most of the defenses we faced this year, South Carolina included, came into the game talking about how their main objective was to contain Taylor Martinez. The fact that defenses went all out to contain Martinez (which made other aspects of their defense vulnerable) is a sign that his big-play threat is there, whether he's showing up on SportsCenter or not.
Isn't it also telling that Wisconsin came out of the game with a player talking about how it was the simplest defensive gameplan they had put into place?
The point of having a running QB, in my opinion, is to add something that some secondary RB or group of RBs can't do. Running point on the option or the zone read with deadly efficiency, that's something. Blowing past safeties with regularity, bull-dozing through the line or shaking multiple defenders, that's something too.
With Taylor, it's neither of those, but it's a third thing: his burst and the fact that he can take it to the house if he's given an obvious lane to go through. These are the kinds of things that qualify as 'significant jolt'. And the problem I am trying to get at, this just doesn't happen very often. The jolt is too often MIA.
If he puts up numbers that are respectable, fine, but
why are we not having a RB do that? Because we can't find some RBs to churn out 800 yards with enough carries?
We are building our offense around this exciting,
FAST player. The sacrifice is a passing game that can't be used too much and is average, at best, in production. This has to be made up for, and if it doesn't add a dimension to the ground game, it's not. JMO.
What Taylor needs to do to contribute enough to the running game is to answer this question: why can't we duplicate his running production with another RB, especially when a stronger passer means less stacked fronts for the backs?
This is independent of whether we have anybody better right now or not, by the way. Just a discussion of whether this is an issue or not.
In typing this over, I think the important point is that the running game doesn't really feed off of Taylor. He doesn't run the option or the zone read too smoothly. If he did, and he was a bigger part of the reason that made Rex or the other backs go, it would change everything, IMO. Maybe I'm heading towards a "come on, OC! Design a better offense for this personnel!" direction.
I hope that answers the question! I am thinking we are headed towards just agree to disagree territory though. The difference may just be an optimistic view of some kind of future potential on your part, and a failure to factor that in on my part.